Correction to Lords Written Ministerial Statement

Earl Attlee: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Philip Hammond) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	On 16 December I and my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence announced that information had come to light regarding the preferred bid in the search and rescue helicopter competition which required clarification.
	In mid-December, the preferred bidder in the SAR-H competition, Soteria, voluntarily came forward to inform the Government of irregularities regarding the conduct of their bid team which had only then recently come to light. The irregularities included access by one of the consortium members, CHC Helicopter, to commercially sensitive information regarding the joint MoD/DfT project team's evaluations of industry bids and evidence that a former member of that project team had assisted the consortium in its bid preparation, contrary to explicit assurances given to the project team.
	Since December, our two departments have been working with Soteria to better understand the situation and its implications for the procurement process. In addition, the Ministry of Defence Police is investigating how the commercially sensitive information came to be in the possession of the bidder. It would be inappropriate to comment further on the details of the investigation until it has finished.
	However, even without the outcome of that investigation, the Government have sufficient information to enable them to conclude that the irregularities that have been identified were such that that it would not be appropriate to proceed with either the preferred bid or with the current procurement process.
	The Department for Transport and the Ministry of Defence will now consider the potential procurement options to meet future requirements for search and rescue helicopters in the United Kingdom, including options to maintain continuity of search and rescue helicopter cover until new longer term arrangements can be put in place.
	We will make a further announcement once a way forward has been agreed.

Equality Act 2010

Lord Freud: My honourable friend the Minister for Disabled People (Maria Miller) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today submitting to Parliament the draft revised Guidance on Matters to be Taken into Account when Determining Questions relating to the Definition of Disability.
	This guidance is primarily for adjudicating bodies (such as courts and tribunals) when they are determining whether a person is a disabled person for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 (EA). These bodies are required by the EA to take account of any aspect of the guidance which appears to them to be relevant when deciding whether a person is disabled for the purpose of the EA.
	The EA prohibits discrimination that occurs in relation to a protected characteristic in a range of circumstances including access to services and public functions, premises, work, education, associations and transport. One of the protected characteristics is disability, which is defined in the EA and regulations made under it.
	Although the definition of disability in the EA is similar to that which applied for the purposes of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), the EA has simplified that definition. Unlike the DDA, it does not require a disabled person to show how their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities affects one of a list of capacities, such as mobility, speech, or the ability to understand.
	Existing guidance was produced under the DDA. That guidance has been updated to reflect the definition of disability which now applies for the purposes of the EA. The revised text was subject to a consultation exercise, between 9 August and 31 October 2010. A report on the Government's response to the consultation has been produced and I have arranged for copies to be placed in the Library of each House.
	I am laying a copy of the draft revised guidance before each House. Subject to parliamentary approval, I aim to bring this revised guidance into force on 1 May 2011.

Higher Education

Baroness Wilcox: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Universities and Science (David Willetts) has today made the following Statement.
	My right honourable friend the Secretary of State and I have today written to the Director of Fair Access setting our expectations about how he should approach the approval and monitoring of new access agreements for higher education institutions. This updates a draft guidance letter that was published on 7 December. A copy of today's letter is in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The guidance to the director sets out significantly increased expectations for the priority that institutions should be giving to fair access and widening participation, focusing more sharply on the outcomes of outreach and other activities, and less on the inputs and processes. In particular the Government believe that progress over the last few years in securing fair access to the most selective universities has been inadequate, and that much more determined action now needs to be taken.
	From September 2012, no institution will be able to levy a graduate contribution above £6,000 without an approved access agreement. Institutions will make their own proposals for the measures they will take and the ambitions they will set for themselves. The director will take his own, independent decisions about each institution's application.
	The Deputy Prime Minister has also announced today further details about the national scholarship programme. This is being published today on the Higher Education Funding Council for England's website, and I am placing copies in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The national scholarship programme will provide financial assistance to students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Each eligible student will receive a benefit of not less than £3,000. All universities charging over £6,000 graduate contribution will be required to participate in the national scholarship programme and will commit more of their own resources towards helping to improve fair access. The Government will contribute £50 million in financial year 2012-13; £100 million in 2013-14; and £150 million from 2014-15.

Insolvency

Baroness Wilcox: My right honourable friend the Minister for Employment Relations, Consumer and Postal Affairs (Edward Davey) has today made the following Statement.
	Everyone who is affected by insolvency, whether they be employees, consumers who have lost deposits or suppliers who have not been paid should have every confidence that insolvency procedures operate fairly and that insolvency practitioners deliver the best possible outcome in what are often difficult and challenging circumstances. In response to the OFT market study into corporate insolvency practitioners, I am today launching a consultation in respect of policy proposals intended to improve confidence in the insolvency regime and lead to better outcomes for those affected by insolvency proceedings.
	These proposals are in line with the policies of this Government to drive balanced and sustainable growth, improve regulation and build a stronger economy. A dynamic economy, where it is easy to start and grow a business, needs effective and efficient insolvency mechanisms which return as much as is fair and possible to creditors when businesses fail.
	The consultation seeks views on proposals to reform the regulatory framework for insolvency practitioners (IPs) and amend some of the technical legislative provisions applicable to companies in administration and liquidation.
	A key proposal is the introduction of an independent complaints body to handle complaints about IPs, including complaints about their fees. While creditors can, at the moment, refer complaints about fees to the courts, this is cumbersome and costly. The new proposals would cut the cost of making a complaint, and would encourage unsecured creditors to hold IPs to account for the fees they charge. Although the OFT study focused solely on the corporate insolvency market, the benefit of these proposals would extend to personal insolvency cases.
	Further information, along with a copy of the consultation document, can be found on the Insolvency Service's website at www.insolvency.gov.uk.

Learning Disability

Earl Howe: My honourable friend the Minister of State, Department of Health (Paul Burstow), has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today formally launching the Government's response to last year's report Raising our Sights: Services for Adults with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities produced by Professor Jim Mansell of the Tizard Centre, Kent. This report is a very valuable contribution to the debate on how we can ensure that people with highly complex needs can be supported to live as independently as possible and as included and valued members of society.
	The Government have made clear their commitment to improving the health and well-being of all people with learning disabilities, including those who have profound intellectual and multiple disabilities. That is why we support this report and have taken on board its central message that the major obstacles to improving outcomes for adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities are prejudice, discrimination and low expectations.
	As our Vision for Adult Social Care, Capable Communities and Active Citizens made clear we were looking to empower service users and those who care for them and to enable a more personalised, preventative service focused on delivering the best outcomes for people who need support, enabling people to live as independently as possible.
	The revised Recognised, Valued and Supported: Next Steps for the Carers Strategy outlines the priorities over the next four years to ensure carers get the support they need. The Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS White Paper set out our long-term vision for the NHS, which puts people at the heart of everything the NHS does and focuses on continuously improving the outcome of their healthcare.
	The response to Raising our Sights responds to the report's 33 detailed recommendations. In addition, Professor Mansell set out five key conclusions:
	adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities are a relatively small, easily identified group of people with undeniable needs for care and support. Despite these needs, they and their families have often not been provided with services to adequately meet them; the personalisation agenda expressed in government policy does appear to provide a better quality of life for adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities and their families. Continued progress in widening access to these kinds of services will enable more people to benefit;there are a number of obstacles to wider implementation to which government and other agencies should attend;shortage of resources may influence the speed with which the recommendations of this report can be implemented but should not change the direction of policy and practice; andLearning Disability Partnership Boards and voluntary bodies will have an even more important role in future in scrutinising services and giving voice to people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities and their families. Government and regulatory bodies should take account of the likely effect of their work on the quality of life of adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities.
	The Government accept and support these conclusions.
	Raising our Sights: Services for Adults with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities and the Government's response have been placed in the Library. Copies of both documents are available to honourable Members from the Vote Office and to noble Lords from the Printed Paper Office.

Local Enterprise Partnerships

Baroness Hanham: My right honourable friend the Minister for Decentralisation (Greg Clark) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I, together with the Minister of State for Business and Enterprise (Mark Prisk), would like to inform the House that today we have written to the proposed York and North Yorkshire and Enterprise M3 local enterprise partnerships inviting them to put their governance arrangements in place.
	Local enterprise partnerships see a real power shift away from central government and quangos towards local communities and the local businesses that really understand the barriers to growth in their areas. This announcement brings the total number of partnerships so far invited to put their governance arrangements in place to 30. We will continue to work with other areas with a view to establishing further local enterprise partnerships across England.

Park Homes

Baroness Hanham: My right honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Local Government (Grant Shapps) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I announced on 14 July 2010 that I intended to bring forward in Parliament secondary legislation that would transfer most of the functions of county courts under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 to residential property tribunals. The aim of the transfer of the jurisdiction is to provide residents of park homes and the owners with a level playing field in the resolution of disputes. This will be achieved by providing access to a dedicated, low-cost specialist (housing) tribunal, which can deal with cases quickly and without the parties needing to be legally represented. The necessary statutory instrument was laid on 31 January and subject to it receiving approval of both Houses of Parliament will come into force on 30 April 2011.
	I am also today announcing my intention to consult on a further package of measures that could improve and modernise the licensing regime that applies to caravan and park home sites to enable local authorities to more effectively monitor and enforce licences and, therefore, better protect the many thousands of older households who live in this sector. I intend to consult on giving local authorities powers to charge site owners for their licensing functions and services instead of these being funded by the taxpayer or not provided at all to a satisfactory standard because authorities do not have the resources to do so. I also intend to consult on enabling the courts to impose higher fines for the most serious breaches of licence fees, and on giving authorities a more effective means of carrying out emergency safety-critical works at the owner's expense where the site owner has refused to do the work himself. I believe these reforms to site licensing will modernise the regime and make it more effective in delivering its objective of ensuring that sites are safe and properly managed.
	I am also concerned about what appears to be abuse by some site owners of their role in approving the purchaser when a resident wishes to sell his park home in the open market. It seems clear that a small minority of site owners will routinely block sales for their own financial gain. I intend to consult on measures which would aim to eliminate this unacceptable practice and extend the role of the residential property tribunal in the approval process.
	I intend to carry out a public consultation on these proposals in the spring.